HISTORICITY OF THE MOSAIC TABERNACLE. 



119 



whose writings and compilations were, in fact, anything but what 

 they seem. Moreover, as we have been reminded this afternoon, 

 among the leaders in Hebrew literature there were men who (so it 

 is said) set themselves to provide, or rather devise, a model structure 

 a good while after the same had been realized in a stately copy I 

 In other words, we are told that these men found delight in 

 describing institutions which never existed ; and, having projected 

 the same into a far distant past, suggested that they formed the 

 germ and inspiration of things which had since become well known ! 

 And what is more, these men succeeded in foisting the said 

 description upon an unsuspecting community. These various 

 positions do not cohere : in fact, any one of them excludes the others. 



Surely some of us remember the time when all possible was done 

 to represent Moses as a decreasing figure in history and literature. 

 It was said, among other things, that he could not have done the 

 things which the Old Testament places to his account. Going into 

 details. Critics sought to show that legend had gathered round the 

 people of Israel ; that the provisions of the Decalogue were in some 

 respects inconceivable; and that the writings of Moses were, in 

 part if not as a whole, pious frauds. When, however, it became 

 evident that the art of writing was more ancient than had been 

 supposed; that the nations which surrounded Palestine had laws 

 which were marvellously comprehensive ; and that the remains of 

 other peoples contained references to ancient Israel, then, by steady 

 steps, Moses became an ascending figure, and to-day he is increasing 

 in reputation both as a man and a law-giver. Indeed, with the 

 discovery of the Code of Khammurabi, it has come to be held that 

 Moses was not only a leader of his people and a great law-giver, 

 but likewise a statesman well acquainted with the laws of other 

 nations, and, moreover, able to make use of the accumulated wisdom 

 and experience of such nations ! 



These facts, as I maintain, indicate the most serious defect of 

 Criticism : it fails to do justice to the documents which relate to 

 the man, his people, and the laws which stand in his name. If 

 Criticism would but take due account of the Old Testament, it 

 would find therein a solution of many of its difficulties. For 

 example, it is said that the children of Israel could not possibly find 

 food in the wilderness. Here the record helps us ; the Divine 

 Redeemer of the people gave them manna — " bread from heaven." 



